It's really just another example of how space exploration has been conducted thus far, prioritising missions depending on the scientific feedback (and the all important cashflow).

With limited resources and literally a whole universe to explore the National agencies have had to focus on the higher priority missions than investigate the first rock from the sun.

In the end though it's not wholy the agencies fault, there must be a certain amount of prioritising. Probably the only way that this is going to change is if there are more craft "up there" to go to the places that we would like to explore and of course, more money!

Hm. Does anyone have a good list of the number of exploratory missions (failures and successes) to each planet? I understand the need for prioritising missions in regards to cost and scientific benefits, but surely Mercury was worth returning to before now?

Once more in this message board it is open stated that NASA is doing things because of being financed by taxes and public debth and that these things are not ever really those desired by the people.

At least here are several people desiring other space activities.

Nova, you're right. And in the long run it may be, that the XPRIZE competition will cause privtely funded scientific space missions. I remember having read of two firms asking for allowance for a special project: They wanted to "throw" a special small robot craft out of the ISS and then to launch it for the moon. The robot's mission was to make a map of the lunar surface for commercial pusposes (for details I would look after the article).

This is an example indicating that private scientific missions may be realistic and possible - the map the robot were to make would be more detailed than other maps.

So if the XPRIZE CUP will have increased the altitude of suborbital flights up to orbits above the ISS someone may find a way to use such suborbital flights for "throwing out" a small unmaaned robot probe to launch itself for an interplanetary goal and then return, There might be several small robots required but someone might find a tricky way to do so.

I think the general jist of the discussion is that NASA just can't do the kind of exploration we desire by itself. But when private companies, universities, scientific foundations, etc. have access to (relatively) cheap transportation, hopefully there will be an explosion of new probes and satellites. And these new missions will be driven by the needs and desires of the companies, universities, foundations, etc. No more monolithic group prioritizing the exploration of space.

Before reading this thread, I guess I had just never really broken out of the tourism/industrial paradigm of things. The purely scientific exploration possibilities are extraordinary!

I think the general jist of the discussion is that NASA just can't do the kind of exploration we desire by itself. But when private companies, universities, scientific foundations, etc. have access to (relatively) cheap transportation, hopefully there will be an explosion of new probes and satellites. And these new missions will be driven by the needs and desires of the companies, universities, foundations, etc. No more monolithic group prioritizing the exploration of space.

Before reading this thread, I guess I had just never really broken out of the tourism/industrial paradigm of things. The purely scientific exploration possibilities are extraordinary!

You better believe it. Universities are the ones that will end up doing most of the research (since that's one of the things that they are so incredibly good at), but remember that it's still all commercialized: somebody's making money doing it. Ain't capitalism wonderful?

Just curious... does anyone know what kind of launch window the MESSENGER mission has? Is it open-ended, or do we have to launch within a given time frame in order to be lined up properly with Mercury?

the most relevant aspect of privte space travel concerning what you say about universities will be that the private way stimulated by the XPRIZE foundation will reduce the costs to a level at which universities and iother scientific institutions will get cheaper what they desire whereas NASA and ESA are unable to give it because they do it at costs to high to be financed by their current fiscal ressources: Consider the fate of the Venus mission of ESA - cancelled because of lack of money but supposingly more expensive than privately might be possible in five to ten years I think.

The universities etc. will get more at less costs the private way - and they will take it.

Tropical Storm... ruined all the fun. It is curious how little we know about our surroundings. Us humans are a tad bit oblivious for the most part, no? Maybe NASA will realize that they will have less to worry about and more time to focus on things such as keeping an extended schedule of missions such as Messenger once they let the private sector take over some of their busywork...

Some speculate that perhaps microbes in the atmosphere are responsible. If ESA's Venus Express is given the final go-ahead later this year, it might help solve the mystery.

It might... doesn't sound like they are sure if it can or not.

I've heard that Sweden is supposedly going to launch something to collect some of Venus's atmosphere later this decade, but I was unable to find that on their website so I'm not sure. I've emailed them so we'll find out soon enough.